On 6/9/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK, good ... I see that the proposed bits have indeed been published to a special repository for testing, and thereby withdraw my -1. But I still recommend a [VOTE] message for a release should specifically include such a URL (and perhaps instructions on how to temporarily modify your Maven settings to download and test this version) instead of just assuming that everyone knows where the bits are, and what to do.
Craig
Craig-
thanks for heads up. That particular RC for the Tomahawk 1.1.3 is
listed available for download under [1]. That Shared 2.0.2 thing is
*no* extra jar to be added to your WEB-INF/lib. The Shared clazzes are
included in Tomahawk (org.apache.myfaces.shared_tomahawk.**)
The folder [1] also contains a pom file for that Tomahawk 1.1.3 RC
OK, good ... I see that the proposed bits have indeed been published to a special repository for testing, and thereby withdraw my -1. But I still recommend a [VOTE] message for a release should specifically include such a URL (and perhaps instructions on how to temporarily modify your Maven settings to download and test this version) instead of just assuming that everyone knows where the bits are, and what to do.
-Matthias
Craig
[1] http://tinyurl.com/mu4t9
On 6/9/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/9/06, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is a vote to release Tomahawk 1.1.3 (and its dependencies:
> > MyFaces Shared 2.0.2 and MyFaces Maven 1.0.3.)
>
>
> I should have spoken up earlier on, but I have a problem with this approach
> to release votes.
>
> In the Struts world, the release manager tends to put up a particular set of
> bits in his or her personal directory on people.apache.org, and then posts
> the vote request as "I propose to release *this set of bits* ..." That way,
> the other committers can download and check out exactly what is being
> proposed.
>
> Yes, with Maven based builds it is easy to assume that you and I will build
> identical artifacts, but it is still easier than you think for that not to
> be the case. Besides that, we caught packaging errors in several of the
> recent Struts Action Framework and Shale builds that would not have been
> caught if we hadn't been examining the actual bits being proposed.
>
> I would strongly suggest following this approach in MyFaces as well.
>
> On this basis, I'm -1 (non-binding as I'm not on the PMC).
>
> Craig
>
>
>
> > +1 for my vote
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > Aechterhoek 18
> > 48282 Emsdetten
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
Aechterhoek 18
48282 Emsdetten
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
